May 2016 SANTA LUCIAN May 2016 Volume 53 No. 5 The official newsletter of the Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club ~ San Luis Obispo County, California I I I n s i d e n s i d e n s i d e n s i d e n s i d e May 9: How to let go 2 May 18: What’s next for oil trains 3 Coastal Commission scandal spreads 4 Tiber Canyon Fun Raiser 5 Classifieds 7 Outings 8 Please recycle This newsletter printed on 100% post-consumer recycled paper with soy- based inks Santa Lucian Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club P. O. Box 15755 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 NONPROFIT ORG. U.S. POSTAGE PAID PERMIT NO. 84 SAN LUIS OBISPO CA 93401 Election Day is June 7 U.S. Congress: Salud Carbajal A Perfect Picture of Paso’s Political Problem Outside the ranks of Phil- lips 66 Santa Maria Refin- ery employees, it’s getting pretty hard to find actual supporters of the oil com- pany’s proposal to haul millions of gallons of Cana- dian tar sands crude oil through the county in mile- long trains comprised of tank cars that have an in- creasingly dubious record of derailing, spilling, and exploding in enormous fireballs -- and that’s in addition to air emissions that would exceed hazard- ous air pollution thresholds. But The Tribune managed to find a small group of folks willing to take a firm “What me worry?” position on the project. And oddly enough, they’re all running for the District 1 seat on the County Board of Supervi- sors. On April 7, per the Tri- bune, “In an instance of unanimity, all four candi- dates said they support the proposal by oil company Phillips 66 to build a rail spur at its Nipomo Mesa refinery to allow the facility to bring up to five large oil trains a week.” No doubt, the candidates consider this position to reflect the sentiments of a majority of their constitu- ents. They shouldn’t be so sure. The oil train activists we work with, in the course of canvassing North County communities and knocking Diablo Up Against It They say it’s no coinci- dence “some things that happen in threes,” and that’s certainly been true this spring for Diablo Canyon and its ongoing watchdog, the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility (A4NR). The unifying theme: Taken together, three ac- tions point to a limited fu- ture for Diablo Canyon and greatly diminished odds for license renewal. 1: Senate Bill 968 On March 29, SB 968, authored by Bill Monning (D-Carmel), passed unani- mously out of the Senate Energy Committee on a bipartisan vote. SB 968 would require PG&E, under the supervision and aus- pices of the CPUC, to con- duct a study of the adverse impacts to the SLO econ- omy and include potential actions to mitigate those impacts if Diablo were to close prematurely or PG&E It’s political support is collapsing, renewable energy is advancing, and environmental law is catching up to California’s last nuke decides not to pursue li- cense renewal for an addi- tional 20 years of operation after 2024. The Monning bill was co- authored by Senator Hannah Beth Jackson (D- Santa Barbara) and Katcho Achadjian (R-San Luis Obispo). In addition to tes- timony from A4NR attorney John Geesman at the hear- ing, the County of San Luis Obispo and the San Luis Unified Coastal School District spoke in support and expressed their thanks to the bill’s authors. The Cities of San Luis Obispo and Morro Bay also support the bill, as does the SLO Economic Vitality Corpora- tion. At the hearing, before calling for the vote, Senator Ben Hueso, chairman of the Energy Committee, said “In my experience working here in California, I can tell you that I don’t think nuclear power is in Cali- fornia’s future. I don’t think it is in the horizon…. the consensus of the legislature, of leaders, is that we want to move in a new direc- tion.” Hardly a ringing endorse- ment for twenty more years of Diablo’s operation, and a hint that SB 968’s call for an economic “plan B” for SLO County is prescient. The bill now moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee, then to the Assembly. To watch the hearing, and for more in- formation on SB 968, visit: a4nr.org/?p=3776. 2: State Lands Commis- sion permit extension On April 5, the State Lands Commission heard a staff report and public com- ment regarding PG&E’s outfall lease permits for Diablo, which will expire in 2018 and 2019. At issue is whether or not PG&E will be required to conduct a full California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review in order to get the permits extended to the end of the NRC reactor licenses in 2024/2025. PG&E (and the three IBEW union represen- tatives speaking at the hear- ing) were only asking for extensions to match the current license expiration and not an extra 20 years. Even if a full Environmen- tal Impact Report under CEQA is somehow waived, PG&E would still be re- quired to conduct an Analy- sis of Public Trust Re- sources and Values. As the staff report noted: Notwithstanding the ap- propriate CEQA consider- ation required, the Commis- sion must prepare an analysis of how the DCPP affects Public Trust re- sources and values. Unlike an EIR…[T]he Commission must consider impacts to the various Public Trust resources and values and balance them in the best By The Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility DIABLO cont. on page 6 Burning Britches: The Sequel BRITCHES cont. on page 3 More tall tales about oil-by-rail Santa Lucia Chapter Board of Supervisors: Eric Michielssen State Senate: Bill Monning Last month, we recounted the saga of the lawyer in Benicia who told the city council a whopper about the recommendation of SLO County planning staff on the proposed Phillips 66 oil train terminal (“Oil Train Project Burns Britches,” April). The law- yer was urging the city council to join SLO County’s Planning Depart- ment in agreeing that their city has no authority over up-rail environmental im- pacts from a similar oil train project bearing down on them, and could not consider such impacts in deciding whether to permit the project… the only problem being that SLO County planners had, in fact, concluded precisely the opposite. More on that later. We’ve also exposed at- tempts by the Phillips rail spur website to misrepresent its own p.r. efforts as edito- rial support by the local media, causing the local media to tell them to stop (“Phillips 66 P.R. Gets Fact Checked,” Feb.), and re- Sierra Club endorsements MONNING cont. on page 4 MICHELSSEN cont. on page 4 CARBAJAL cont. on page 4 The race for the 24th Congressional district is one of the most hotly con- tested electoral contests in the country this year. In 2004, Carbajal was elected to the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervi- sors, where he has demon- strated a commitment to protecting the environment, promoting sustainability, It’s almost as though Michielssen’s multiple ca- reer paths were designed to make him uniquely qualified to represent his district on the board of supervisors. A resident of San Luis Obispo County since enroll- ing at Cal Poly in 1967, he earned a degree in Sociol- ogy and Public Administra- tion, obtained a teaching credential from Cal Poly and taught special education and coached varsity tennis from 1973-78. After teaching, he was a real estate professional for nearly 20 years, owning Monning was the first California state senator to express deep misgivings about how the Trans-Pa- cific Partnership (TPP) would impact the environ- ment, energy, and natural resources in our state (see page 5). He authored the Sustain- able Seafood Labeling Act -- the first such legislation Doc Searls on doors to educate people about what the Phillips 66 project would mean for them -- especially those living within half a mile of the Union Pacific main line, aka the “blast zone,” home to the majority of the residents of Paso Robles -- have found no love for oil trains. It may be that one brave and/or smart District 1 candidate will eventually prove savvy enough to realize that he is out of step with his potential constituents and it would behoove him to break away from the pack and show some concern for the health and welfare of the North County residents who don’t feel like auditioning for the role of human sacri- fice in the name of an ideol- ogy that champions any industry’s upward-marching profit margin at any cost. That smart candidate may realize that such ideology wears thin fast when the realization sets in that “any cost” includes cardio-pul- monary disease, watching the oily destruction of your favorite creek, or the incin- eration of your home, your business, your family and a large swath of your commu- nity.
Transcript
Santa Lucian • May 20161
SANTA LUCIAN May 2016
Volume 53 No. 5T h e o f f i c i a l n e w s l e t te r o f th e Sa n ta L u c i a C h a p te r o f t h e S i e r r a C l u b ~ Sa n L u i s O b i s p o Co u n t y, C a l i f o r n i a
IIIII n s i d en s i d en s i d en s i d en s i d eMay 9: How to let go 2
May 18: What’s next for oil trains 3
Coastal Commission scandal spreads 4
Tiber Canyon Fun Raiser 5
Classifieds 7
Outings 8
Please recycle
This newsletter printed on100% post-consumer recycled paper with soy-
based inks
Sant
a Lu
cian
Sant
a Lu
cia
Cha
pter
of t
he S
ierr
a C
lub
P. O
. Box
1575
5Sa
n Lu
is O
bisp
o, C
A 9
3406
NO
NPR
OFI
T O
RG.
U.S
. PO
STA
GE
PAID
PER
MIT
NO
. 84
SAN
LU
IS O
BIS
POC
A 9
3401
Election Dayis June 7
U.S. Congress:Salud Carbajal
A Perfect Picture ofPaso’s Political Problem
Outside the ranks of Phil-lips 66 Santa Maria Refin-ery employees, it’s gettingpretty hard to find actualsupporters of the oil com-pany’s proposal to haulmillions of gallons of Cana-dian tar sands crude oilthrough the county in mile-long trains comprised oftank cars that have an in-creasingly dubious recordof derailing, spilling, andexploding in enormousfireballs -- and that’s inaddition to air emissionsthat would exceed hazard-ous air pollution thresholds. But The Tribune managedto find a small group offolks willing to take a firm“What me worry?” positionon the project. And oddlyenough, they’re all runningfor the District 1 seat on theCounty Board of Supervi-sors. On April 7, per the Tri-bune, “In an instance ofunanimity, all four candi-dates said they support theproposal by oil companyPhillips 66 to build a railspur at its Nipomo Mesarefinery to allow the facilityto bring up to five large oiltrains a week.” No doubt, the candidatesconsider this position toreflect the sentiments of amajority of their constitu-ents. They shouldn’t be sosure. The oil train activistswe work with, in the courseof canvassing North Countycommunities and knocking
Diablo Up Against It
They say it’s no coinci-dence “some things thathappen in threes,” and that’scertainly been true thisspring for Diablo Canyonand its ongoing watchdog,the Alliance for NuclearResponsibility (A4NR). The unifying theme:Taken together, three ac-tions point to a limited fu-ture for Diablo Canyon andgreatly diminished odds forlicense renewal.
1: Senate Bill 968 On March 29, SB 968,authored by Bill Monning(D-Carmel), passed unani-mously out of the SenateEnergy Committee on abipartisan vote. SB 968would require PG&E, underthe supervision and aus-pices of the CPUC, to con-duct a study of the adverseimpacts to the SLO econ-omy and include potentialactions to mitigate thoseimpacts if Diablo were toclose prematurely or PG&E
It’s political support is collapsing, renewable energy is advancing,and environmental law is catching up to California’s last nuke
decides not to pursue li-cense renewal for an addi-tional 20 years of operationafter 2024. The Monning bill was co-authored by SenatorHannah Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara) and KatchoAchadjian (R-San LuisObispo). In addition to tes-timony from A4NR attorneyJohn Geesman at the hear-ing, the County of San LuisObispo and the San LuisUnified Coastal SchoolDistrict spoke in supportand expressed their thanksto the bill’s authors. TheCities of San Luis Obispoand Morro Bay also supportthe bill, as does the SLOEconomic Vitality Corpora-tion. At the hearing, beforecalling for the vote, SenatorBen Hueso, chairman ofthe Energy Committee, said“In my experience workinghere in California, I can tellyou that I don’t thinknuclear power is in Cali-
fornia’s future. I don’t thinkit is in the horizon…. theconsensus of the legislature,of leaders, is that we wantto move in a new direc-tion.” Hardly a ringing endorse-ment for twenty more yearsof Diablo’s operation, and ahint that SB 968’s call foran economic “plan B” forSLO County is prescient.The bill now moves to theSenate AppropriationsCommittee, then to theAssembly. To watch thehearing, and for more in-formation on SB 968, visit:a4nr.org/?p=3776.
2: State Lands Commis-sion permit extension On April 5, the StateLands Commission heard astaff report and public com-ment regarding PG&E’soutfall lease permits forDiablo, which will expire in2018 and 2019. At issue iswhether or not PG&E willbe required to conduct a fullCalifornia EnvironmentalQuality Act (CEQA) reviewin order to get the permitsextended to the end of theNRC reactor licenses in2024/2025. PG&E (and thethree IBEW union represen-tatives speaking at the hear-ing) were only asking forextensions to match thecurrent license expirationand not an extra 20 years.Even if a full Environmen-tal Impact Report underCEQA is somehow waived,PG&E would still be re-quired to conduct an Analy-sis of Public Trust Re-sources and Values. As thestaff report noted: Notwithstanding the ap-propriate CEQA consider-ation required, the Commis-sion must prepare ananalysis of how the DCPPaffects Public Trust re-sources and values. Unlikean EIR…[T]he Commissionmust consider impacts tothe various Public Trustresources and values andbalance them in the best
By The Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility
DIABLO cont. on page 6
Burning Britches: The Sequel
BRITCHES cont. on page 3
More tall tales about oil-by-rail
Santa LuciaChapter
Board of Supervisors:Eric Michielssen
State Senate:Bill Monning
Last month, we recountedthe saga of the lawyer inBenicia who told the citycouncil a whopper aboutthe recommendation ofSLO County planning staffon the proposed Phillips 66oil train terminal (“OilTrain Project BurnsBritches,” April). The law-yer was urging the citycouncil to join SLOCounty’s Planning Depart-ment in agreeing that theircity has no authority overup-rail environmental im-pacts from a similar oiltrain project bearing downon them, and could notconsider such impacts indeciding whether to permitthe project… the onlyproblem being that SLO
County planners had, in fact,concluded precisely theopposite. More on that later. We’ve also exposed at-tempts by the Phillips railspur website to misrepresentits own p.r. efforts as edito-rial support by the localmedia, causing the localmedia to tell them to stop(“Phillips 66 P.R. Gets FactChecked,” Feb.), and re-
Sierra Club endorsements
MONNING cont. on page 4 MICHELSSEN cont. on page 4 CARBAJAL cont. on page 4
The race for the 24thCongressional district isone of the most hotly con-tested electoral contests inthe country this year. In 2004, Carbajal waselected to the Santa BarbaraCounty Board of Supervi-sors, where he has demon-strated a commitment toprotecting the environment,promoting sustainability,
It’s almost as thoughMichielssen’s multiple ca-reer paths were designed tomake him uniquely qualifiedto represent his district onthe board of supervisors. A resident of San LuisObispo County since enroll-ing at Cal Poly in 1967, heearned a degree in Sociol-ogy and Public Administra-tion, obtained a teachingcredential from Cal Polyand taught special educationand coached varsity tennisfrom 1973-78.After teaching, he was a realestate professional fornearly 20 years, owning
Monning was the firstCalifornia state senator toexpress deep misgivingsabout how the Trans-Pa-cific Partnership (TPP)would impact the environ-ment, energy, and naturalresources in our state (seepage 5). He authored the Sustain-able Seafood Labeling Act-- the first such legislation
Doc Searls
on doors to educatepeople about whatthe Phillips 66project would mean
for them -- especially those living withinhalf a mile of the UnionPacific main line, aka the“blast zone,” home to themajority of the residents ofPaso Robles -- have foundno love for oil trains. It may be that one braveand/or smart District 1candidate will eventuallyprove savvy enough torealize that he is out ofstep with his potentialconstituents and it wouldbehoove him to breakaway from the pack and
show some concern for thehealth and welfare of theNorth County residents whodon’t feel like auditioningfor the role of human sacri-fice in the name of an ideol-ogy that champions anyindustry’s upward-marchingprofit margin at any cost. That smart candidate mayrealize that such ideologywears thin fast when therealization sets in that “anycost” includes cardio-pul-monary disease, watchingthe oily destruction of yourfavorite creek, or the incin-eration of your home, yourbusiness, your family and alarge swath of your commu-nity.
2 Santa Lucian • May 2016
The Executive Committee meetsthe second Monday of every monthat 5:30 p.m. The ConservationCommittee meets the secondFriday at 1p.m. at the chapter office,located at 974 Santa Rosa St., SanLuis Obispo. All members arewelcome to attend.
Denny Mynatt PRINT MEDIA COORDINATOR
Energy Task Force Karen MerriamIntergenerational Task Force
Water Subcommittee Keith Wimer
Committee ChairsPolitical David BouquinDevelopment openConservation Sue Harvey
Nuclear Power Task Force Rochelle Becker Linda Seeley Climate Change Task Force Heidi Harmon
Victoria Carranza
Printed by University Graphic Systems CalPoly, San Luis Obispo. Mailing servicescourtesy of Silver Streaks.
Office hours Monday-Friday,1 p.m. - 7 p.m., 974 Santa RosaStreet, San Luis Obispo
The Santa Lucian is published 10 times ayear. Articles, environmental information andletters to the editor are welcome. Thedeadline for each issue is the 13th of theprior month.
send to:Editor, Santa Lucianc/o Santa Lucia Chapter, Sierra ClubP.O. Box 15755San Luis Obispo, CA [email protected]
Santa Lucia Chapter
2016 Executive CommitteeKaren Merriam (12/18) CHAIRLindi Doud (12/17) TREASURERJohn Alan Connerley (12/16) SECRETARYSue Harvey (12/16) MEMBERCal French (12/16) MEMBERPatrick McGibney (12/17) MEMBER
John Alan Connerley COUNCIL OF CLUB LEADERS
Andrew Christie
Sierra Club General MeetingDavid’s Dozen: The Best Unfamiliar Hikes in San Luis Obispo County7-9 p.m., Tuesday, May 31st
Experienced outings leader David Georgi treats usto a presentation of another dozen of his favorite,less-travelled trails, with slides, of course. Lastyear’s edition drew an SRO crowd, so come earlyto get your seat. Environmental announcementsbegin the meeting.
Steynberg Gallery, 1531 Monterey St., SLO.Info.: Joe Morris, 549-0355.
Sierra Club lost a great Central Coast activist with the passing of Jerry Connor on April 4 in SantaMaria. Mainstay of the Los Padres Chapter’s Arguello Group in Northern Santa Barbara County for atleast twenty years, Jerry was known as an indefatigable outings leader and program organizer, andserved as the Chapter’s delegate to the annual meeting of the California-Nevada Regional Conserva-tion Committee in San Luis Obispo. “Jerry’s years of dedication and hard work for the Sierra Club will be deeply missed,” said Los Pa-dres Chapter Chair Jim Hines. “I am filled with sadness but take comfort in knowing Jerry is leadinggreat hikes in a special place now. A great man who worked for so many years on issues for us in NorthSB County, and his outing trips were enjoyed by so many, many people over the years.”
Oscar-nominated Gasland filmmaker Josh Fox is back with a harrowing new film on climate change. In How to Let Go of the World and Love All the Things Climate Can’t Change, Fox continues in hisdeeply personal style, investigating the greatest threat the planet has ever known. Traveling to 12 countries on 6 continents, the film acknowledges that it may be too late to stop someof the worst consequences and asks what is it that climate change can’t destroy? What is so deep withinus that no calamity can take it away? We’re already seeing the impacts of climate change. Now is the time for communities to come to-gether to take action to stop fossil fuel development and transition to 100% renewable energy. That’swhat the Let Go And Love Tour is about -- pulling into SLO on May 9. For venue and times, go to www.howtoletgomovie.com.
May 9: Josh Fox Comesto SLO with New Film
On March 29, KateSheppard, senior re-porter on environmentand energy for theHuffington Post, publisheda story that illuminated thelengths energy utilities aregoing to in an attempt toclean up their image andpull out of the “death spi-ral” that the rise of rooftopsolar power has plungedthem into: more peopleswitching from utility-sup-plied power to their ownsolar power when they de-termine rooftop solar makesbetter financial sense, leav-ing the ranks of utility rate-payers, causing the utilitiesto raise rates on remainingratepayers, which causesrooftop solar to look evenmore attractive, whichcauses more ratepayers toleave the utility in favor ofrooftop solar, etc. Since the spectacle ofmonopoly utilities fightingto kill off rooftop solar na-tionwide has not been agreat look for the utilities,the Edison Electric Insti-tute, the trade organizationfor investor-owned electriccompanies, has hired acommunications consultantto work on their imageproblem. The Huffington Post ob-tained a full audio recordingand transcript of EEI’sJanuary board meeting, inwhich Brian Wolff, EEI’sexecutive VP for publicpolicy, revealed a majorimage-brightener for utili-ties: They will start refer-ring to their huge solarfarms as “community solar”instead of “utility-scalesolar.” We’ll let Ms. Sheppardtake it from there in thefollowing judicious ex-cerpts, which contain thecrux of the matter. Her en-tire article is worth seekingout on line -- either underits original title “This Mes-saging Guru is HelpingUtilities Clean Up TheirAppearance” at HuffPo, oras more evocatively titled atGrist, “PR guru attempts theimpossible: convince every-one utility companies are allright.”). ___
This is a particularly hotissue in the world of elec-tricity policy. Across thecountry, the price ofinstalling solar panels onhomes and businesses hasdeclined, thanks to marketforces and policies like taxincentives that make it moreappealing.... Rooftop solargives individuals and busi-nesses independence, andexpands energy sourcesbeyond utility companies. “Utility-scale” solar isnice, the advocates say, butpeople and communitiesshould also be producingenergy from the sun. The messaging plan theutility industry is develop-ing seeks to tap into that
When “CommunitySolar”Isn’t
ThankYou,JerryConnor
sentiment by droppingthe term “utility-scale solar”in favor of “communitysolar.” “‘Community solar’ reallyresonated with customers… They really wantedsomething that defined whatit meant to be community,”Wolff said at the meeting.“We should proceed withthe terminology that is morefavorable to us,” he said.“And ‘community’ is clearlymore favorable to us.” One problem, though:“Community solar” is al-ready a term in use to de-scribe something outsidethe utility industry. It refersto solar projects owned bythe public or a joint entity
— panels on a shared hous-ing complex, for example,or an array shared by mul-tiple businesses poolingtheir funds. There are 91community solar projectsaround the country, accord-ing to the Solar EnergyIndustries Association.... Bryan Miller, a vice presi-dent at the rooftop solarcompany Sunrun and presi-dent of the Alliance forSolar Choice, said he thinksthe branding effort reflects
utilities’ growing concernabout rooftop power sys-tems taking a chunk out oftheir business. He called theco-option of communitysolar “dishonest politics,”given the fight utilities havewaged against rooftop solarin some states. “Instead of renamingtheir actions, they shouldchange their actions,” saidMiller. “Then they wouldn’thave to worry about how tospin them.”
If you can’tbeat ‘em,fool ‘em
Santa Lucian • May 20163
Change of Address?
Sierra Club85 Second St., 2nd FloorSan Francisco, CA 94105-3441
On May 16, the County Planning Commission will vote on the permit for an oiltrain terminal at the Phillips 66 refinery on the Nipomo Mesa. At press time, wedon’t know what they’re going to decide, but we know this: It ain’t over. ThePlanning Commission’s vote will be the end of the first chapter in the saga ofwhat needs to be done to save the Central Coast from the threat of oil-by-rail.
On May 18, the groups that have been organizing to stop thisproject will lay out the rest of the story, and what partyou can play in it.
PROTECTSLO.ORG
counted how Phillips 66came to have a fine leviedagainst it by the Fair Politi-cal Practices Commissionfor sending out a deceptivemailer on a ballot initiative(“The Ongoing Struggle:Phillips 66 v. Truth,” April). Maintaining tradition,Phillips 66 representativesat the April 15 County Plan-ning Commission hearingon their proposed NipomoMesa oil train terminal triedto find any way they couldto avoid admitting to thevolatility of the diluted Ca-nadian tar sands crude oilbitumen – “dilbit” – thatthey want to haul throughthe County every week.Company reps made severalattempts to downplay thereasons why this substanceis classified as “packinggroup one,” the highestlevel of hazard classifica-tion for rail shipment.Finally Planning Commis-sioner Jim Irving askedrefinery superintendent JimAnderson, “Is it going toblow up or not?” “We’ll use 117-R cars,”Anderson replied. Planning staff finally putan end to the applicants’ tapdancing, pointing out that,yes, rail-transported tarsands dilbit can and doesblow up, producing thegiant fireballs we’ve allseen on the news, and pre-sents a “significant risk.” Then the lawyer for Phil-lips 66 assured the commis-sioners that the risk assess-ment in the project’s Envi-ronmental Impact Reportwas based on five trains perweek, not three; it assumedthe use of older rail cars,not the 117-R type pro-posed for the project; andthe report’s assessment ofthe volatility of the oil was“based on the volatility ofBakken crude as a surro-gate” for the tar sands crudethe trains would actually becarrying. And because theEIR made all these mis-takes, the impacts of theproject would be much lessthan supposed. John Pierson, theCounty’s EIR consultantimmediately responded“That’s not an accuratestatement,” and pointed outthat, in fact, the hazard as-sessment was based on tarsands crude, it did assessthe alternatives of both fiveand three trains per week; itdid assess the use of 117-Rtank cars, and the result ofall those assessments wasthat the impact of theproject in any configuration“was a significant impact.” Fortunately for the oilcompany’s lawyer, the threestrikes law did not apply. More rain on Phillips’slippery parade: Staffpointed out that the oil com-pany’s grand gesture to cutthe proposed number oftrains from five to three perweek would reduce theheightened on-site cancerrisk, but would not reducethe level of diesel particu-
late matter below maximumpermissible levels, puttingthe County out of attain-ment for federal air qualitystandards and thereby trig-gering a county-wide regu-latory crackdown on allcommercial enterprises. Deputy County CounselWhitney McDonald alsopointed out that the three-trains-per-week offer is“likely not enforceable” asa condition of a permit. The popular threat heardthroughout these hearings— if they can’t get a permitfor an oil train terminal tobring in the world’s dirtiestoil, Phillips will just turn tolots and lots of tanker trucks— deflated when it waspointed out that such a planwould be proscribed bothby the capacity of the SantaMaria pump station and bySanta Barbara County’s capon oil truck traffic.
Word from on high As we predicted it wouldlast month, Phillips is con-centrating its legal fire-power on a two-front war:federal preemption andEnvironmentally SensitiveHabitat Area (ESHA). On the federal preemptionfront, after the Benicialawyer’s pants-on-fire at-tempt to trick the city coun-cil on this issue, the Valerooil train project was dealt amajor rebuke in an April 14letter from California Attor-ney General Kamala Harris-- a rebuke that appliesequally to those making thesame preemption argumentin the attempt to push thePhillips 66 project throughin SLO.
Harris wrote:
[Federal Interstate Com-merce law] does notpreempt or constrain theCity’s discretionary de-cision-making authoritywhere, as here, the Cityis exercising that author-ity with respect to a
Britchescontinued from page 1
By Concerned Citizens for Avila
Save the Date: June 13Budget Vote for Avila AreaPlan Update On Monday, June 13, the SLOBoard of Supervisors will bedeciding on allocating $850,000to the Avila Area General Planupdate. The update allocation isalso needed for the highly important study underway of theunique traffic evaluation method for Avila which dismissessummer traffic and does not allow for its mitigation. We have been told by Planning staff it is important forConcerned Citizens to be at the meeting, in our blue t-shirts(or any royal blue shirt you have), with a few speakers rein-forcing the reasons it is so important to make sure this ef-fort is funded. We will remind them of their 5-0 vote lastOctober in favor of the update, and the 800+ signaturescollected on the petition.
Save the Date: July 19Traffic Study Underway On Tuesday, July 19, the SLO Board of Supervisors willbe discussing the Resource Management System (RMS)concerning traffic in Avila. The RMS Study committee is
A Stop Oil-by-Rail Town Hall: Next Steps
project undertaken by anoil company that is notsubject to the jurisdic-tion of the Surface trans-portation Board (STB).
That’s the state’s top coppointing out that an oilcompany is not a railroad. She continued:
On the ESHA front, Phil-lips is continuing to arguethat twenty acres of the railspur construction site can-not legally be consideredEnvironmentally SensitiveHabitat Area – a no-devel-opment-allowed designation– based on administrativetechnicalities relating totiming of the submission ofthe permit application. Theentity that literally wrote thebook on ESHA and is thefinal arbiter in such dis-putes, the CaliforniaCoastal Commission, dis-missed Phillips’ arguments
in February in a letter to theCounty. Cassidy Teufel, asenior environmental scien-tist with the Commission,wrote that their staff’s 2015evaluation of the site “sup-port(s) the finding that asubstantial area of sensitivedune vegetation is presentwithin the proposed projectfootprint and that this habi-tat is an environmentallysensitive habitat area(ESHA) based on its rarityand susceptibility to distur-bance or degradation.” Phillips lawyer told theplanning commission wehave “a struggle in our gut”over this issue because itseems unfair that Phillips,after being allowed to buildan oil refinery, can’t alsobuild a rail spur just be-cause of some rare andthreatened species clutter-ing up the place. The point was moot, ac-cording to the lawyer, be-cause the original map ofESHA at the refinery site,circa 1986, did not indicatethat ESHA was present onthe 20-acre parcel now des-ignated as the area for theproposed rail spur, and thefact that the County’s fieldreview team, a Fish andGame biologist and Coastal
Commissionstaff subse-quently deter-mined that thesite is ESHAsimply doesn’tmatter -- i.e.it’s too late,carved instone, can’tmake anychanges. Planningstaff puncturedthat argumentby pointing outthat “there’s novesting status”in the map ofESHA, and infact the Plan-ning Commis-sion “can takeall the informa-tion in therecord regard-less of the tim-ing of when itwas submittedand apply it towhatever deci-sion youchoose. Justbecause theinformationcame laterdoesn’t meanyou have toignore it.”
Here’s the problem County air pollution control officer Larry Allen pointed out toplanning commissioners at their April 15 meeting that the Phillips 66 project will emitparticulate matter above the limit for healthful air quality, no matter how Phillips mightconfigure the project.
A Hot Summer in Avila Beachmade up of 4 members of County staff, a hiredconsultant, 3 members of Avila Valley AdvisoryCouncil (AVAC) and 2 members of ConcernedCitizens for Avila. The purpose of the study is toanalyze the historical background of and determineif the current method of accounting for trafficanalysis in Avila Beach still has merit.* Countystaff will most likely present several options to the
Board of Supervisors for consideration. County staff hopesto have enough data to complete the study and present toAVAC at the May meeting. Concerned Citizens are urged to attend the July 19 meet-ing and show support for this important issue. Wear yourroyal blue t-shirts! Learn more by attending the Monday,May 9, AVAC meeting, 7 p.m., at the PG&E CommunityCenter, 6588 Ontario Road. Chevron has its application for a resort on Avila Point “onhold” and, therefore, the EIR has not proceeded.
*Just in Avila, traffic for proposed projects is evaluated solely ona second weekday in May, even for visitor-serving projects that
will have most traffic on summer weekends. The outcome isinsufficient mitigation of realistic impacts.
In fact, for Benicia toturn a blind eye to themost serious of theProject’s environmentalimpacts, merely be-cause they flow fromfederally-regulated railoperations, would becontrary to both stateand federal law.
4 Santa Lucian • May 2016
Sierra Club California’s Priority Bills
The Fair Political Prac-tices Commission is nowinvestigating complaintsagainst four members of theCalifornia Coastal Commis-sion. All four voted to firethe Commission’s formerExecutive Director, CharlesLester, against overwhelm-ing public opposition, at theCommission’s February 10meeting in Morro Bay, amove that was widely re-garded as a blow struckagainst the independence ofCommission staff and asignal of the willingness bythe majority of Commis-sioners to relax or ignorethe requirements of theCoastal Act in order to per-mit more development. A second FPPC complaintagainst Commissioner ErikHowell, a member of the
Pismo Beach City Council,amplifies on a complaintfiled last month pertainingto the number of votes hecast on projects that wererepresented before the com-mission by McCabe & Co.after he accepted a politicaldonation from the opera-tions manager and life part-ner of uber-lobbyist SusanMcCabe. A complaint against Com-missioner Martha McClure,a Del Norte County Super-visor, noted that she doesnot appear to have filed anyfinancial disclosure state-ments in the last four years,a significant infraction, inaddition to engaging in thesame practice as Howell:Voting on projects broughtbefore the Commission byMcCabe & Co. after receiv-
ing donations from a repre-sentative of McCabe’s firm. The complaint againstCommissioner Mark Vargasseeks financial records ofhis junket to Ireland to meetwith U2 guitarist DavidEvans and catch a U2 con-cert just before voting toissue Evans a permit tobuild a multi-million dollarcompound in Malibu. The complaint againstWendy Mitchell alleges thatshe failed to disclose thatCarollo Engineers was aclient of her consulting firmwhen she deliberated andvoted on a Santa Barbaradesal project on whichCarollo served as a repre-sentative. The FPPC did not dis-close the identity of thecomplainants.
Continuing coastal crisis
Corruption Charges DogCoastal CommissionersHowell hit by second FPPC complaint, joined by Mitchell, Vargas, McClure
The April 13 hearing ofthe Coastal Commission inSanta Rosa was electricwith anticipation. A crowdof approximately 500people gathered that firstday of the three-day hearingto show their support forcommission staff in recom-mending a “No” vote forthe Department of Parksand Recreation’s proposalto charge fees at historicallyfree beaches in SonomaCounty. After seven-plus hours ofpresentation and publiccomment, Commissioners
voted to continue the item. Prior to the vote, actingExecutive Director JackAinsworth strongly advisedagainst the motion to con-tinue, emphasizing theamount of time alreadygiven to the proposal, theever-increasing staffworkload and the disruptionof other priorities includingefforts to assist countieswith Local Coastal Plans, along-standing issue of ur-gency. The Commission’s staffreport highlighted the feeissue as a social justice
issue. The proposed chargeof $8 would deter manypeople from visiting statebeaches and parks andwould diminish the abilityof others to visit as often.The reality is, for manyresidents of Sonoma County$8 is a substantial charge,especially when the cumula-tive amount is considered. Aweekly trip to the beachwould end up costing afamily over $400 per year. Particularly touching tes-timony came from KashiaPomo tribal members whopointed out that these are
sacred spots and DPRwould essentially forcethem to “pay to pray.” Sonoma County RegionalParks Director Caryl Harthad testified that her agencywould be glad to take overmanagement of BodegaHead – the most visited ofthe state beaches pegged fornew fees – in order to keepthe park open without newfees. Commissioners di-rected members of theCoastal Commission, Com-mission staff, DPR, SonomaCounty Board of Supervi-sors and Sonoma CountyParks convene to work out apath forward. Despite the fact that theCommission punted its de-cision until after these forth-coming meetings and ig-nored the staff recom-mendation and the public’sdemands, the fact thatDPR’s proposal wasn’tapproved outright meanscoastal access hasn’t beenlost – yet. As the sayinggoes, “In the environment,every victory is temporary,every defeat permanent.” Other items heard later inthe week included an after-the-fact permit for anEncinitas seawall and otherbluff modifications. This item had the begin-nings of setting a good pre-cedent; staff called for theapplication of mitigationfees for the loss of publicaccess and recreation areadue to the seawall’s installa-tion. This seawall not onlyperforms as other seawallsdo – inhibiting sand replen-ishment to maintain beacharea – but is also a casewhere high tide alreadyreaches all the way up to thebluff. Factored into the publicaccess and mitigation feewas the fact that the appli-cant had repeatedly disre-garded permitting require-ments and ignored staff’sattempts to bring him intocompliance for years. Unfortunately, Commis-sioners thought the fee un-warranted and called for itto be removed and the per-mit to be granted.
Decision delayed on fees for access to State Beaches
Erik Howell Martha McClure Wendy Mitchell Mark Vargas
and community welfare. He has stood up againstdevelopments on theGaviota Coast that threat-ened preservation efforts,opposed new offshore oildevelopment along ourcoast, and worked to imple-ment a Climate Action Planfor Santa Barbara countyand make solar energy anaffordable efficient optionfor homeowners. He haspromoted innovative solu-tions to addressing environ-mental sustainability andadvocating for job creationin this emerging industry. Drawing on his childhoodexperiences growing up inan economically disadvan-taged neighborhood, hedisplays a passion for im-proving the lives of at-risk
several real estate compa-nies including Better Homes& Gardens. He also helpeddesign and build Vista DelNorte Townhomes and LosArboles, thoughtfully de-signed, small-lot infillhomes and commercialproperties in Atascadero. Herecently retired after 17years as Corporate Brokerand Asset Manager forPeoples’ Self-Help Housing,an award-winning non-profitthat develops affordablehousing for low-income andspecial needs households,where he negotiated prop-erty tax agreements withCounty Assessors and Cali-fornia Franchise Tax Board. Today, Michielssen and hiswife Dana operate PozoOrganic Farm, which theybuilt from the ground up,employing sustainable prac-tices. He represents otherorganic farmers and farmer’s
Michielssencontinued from page 1
Monningcontinued from page 1
Carbajalcontinued from page 1
youth, mentorship programfor at-risk youth and pro-viding summer program-ming for kids. Carbajal has served on anumber of national andregional committees focus-ing on climate change, chil-dren and families, and se-nior issues. He has beenrecognized for his leader-ship by a number of organi-zations, including the Com-munity EnvironmentalCouncil, which gave him itsEnvironmental Hero Awardin 2014. It’s almost needless to addthat he has received theSierra Club’s endorsementin every race he’s run. To help out with the cam-paign, go to saludcarbajal.com.
markets on the County’sAgricultural Liaison Advi-sory Board and serves asSLO Chapter Secretary/Treasurer of CaliforniaCertified Organic Farmers(CCOF), President of theSLO Natural Foods Co-OpBoard of Directors, andwas President of the SanLuis Obispo Grange. Hehas served his communityas an Atascadero planningcommissioner, President ofthe Chamber of Commerce,and a Special Educationteacher at Templeton El-ementary School. Our Political Committeewas suitably impressedwith Michielssen’s grasp ofthe issues and the fact thathe opposes the Phillips 66oil train project, whereashis opponent won’t say. To help out with the cam-paign, go to eric4supervisor.com.
in the nation- and co-authored landmark legisla-tion to reverse the adverseimpacts of climate change;advocated for the protectionof endangered species andthe elimination of animalcruelty; and passed legisla-tion to continue the volun-tary tax check-off to fundresearch for the preserva-tion and safety of sea otters.He worked with the Big SurCoastal Trail WorkingGroup to develop a commu-nity-based planning processfor the California CoastalTrail through Big Sur. When he was first electedto the 17th Senate District,we had some concernsabout how the former SantaCruz Assemblyman wouldadjust to representing adistrict containing a nuclearpower plant. We needn’thave worried. Last Septem-
ber, Monning hosted aDiablo Canyon seismicsafety town hall at CuestaCollege. He has authoredboth Senate Bill 968 (seefront page), and SB 657,mandating that the fundingof the Diablo Canyon Inde-pendent Peer Review Panel(IPRP) be extended to theend of the plant’s license in2025. The IPRP’s probingquestions and pointed cri-tiques of PG&E’s “every-thing’s fine” assessments ofseismic threats to the planthave been a thorn in theside of the utility, whichmade a habit of ignoring theIPRP and was looking for-ward to its early termina-tion. Too bad for PG&E.Thank you, SenatorMonning. To help out with the cam-paign, go to www.billmonning.org/2016/index.html
Each year, Sierra Club California staff andvolunteer leaders work together to analyzeand determine Club positions on hundredsof bills at the legislature. From among thoseon which we take a position, a number riseto the top as priority bills that deserve spe-cial attention and that we encourage ourmembers to bring to the attention of theirlegislators. This is our Legislative Priority List as ofApril 3. Check for updates at sierraclub.org/california.
The bills are listed by house and in as-cending numerical order. Bills introducedby Assembly members begin with AB.Bills introduced by Senators begin withSB. At press time, some of these bills havebeen held or killed in a committee or onthe Senate or Assembly floor, some havepassed through the legislature, and somehave been signed or vetoed by the gover-nor. To stay alive, current bills will have topass out of the Appropriations Committeeby the end of May.
AB 2415 (Garcia, E) Cali-fornia Clean Truck, Bus,and Off-Road Vehicle andEquipment TechnologyProgram. This bill, pushedby the natural gas industry,would stifle the state’s ef-forts to accelerate commer-cialization of zero-emissionheavy-duty trucks andbuses, including electricdrayage trucks and electric
transit buses, by directingfunding to trucks poweredby polluting methane. Op-pose.
SB 380 (Pavley) Naturalgas storage: moratorium.This would impose an im-mediate moratorium onnatural gas injection and arestriction on natural gasproduction at the Aliso Can-yon storage facility, where amajor gas leak occurred inlate 2015 and early 2016,forcing evacuation and thou-sands of residents and re-leasing tons of greenhousegas pollution, until certainsafety conditions are met.Support.
SB 887 (Pavley) Naturalgas storage wells. This billwould develop a comprehen-sive reform of how the Divi-sion of Oil, Gas, and Geo-thermal Resources(DOGGR) oversees methanegas storage wells. Support.
SB 888 (Allen) Gas corpo-rations: emergency man-agement. This bill assures atimely response to methaneleaks at storage facilities bydesignating an agency re-sponsible for action andhelps to fund those actionswith a new account fundedby violators. Support.
SB 1393 (De León) Intrast-ate transmission line:safety valves. This bill willwould require the PublicUtilities Commission (PUC)to require utilities to installautomatic or remote con-trolled shutoff valves onintrastate transmission linesthat transport gas to or froma storage facility, if it is nec-essary to protect the public.Support.
SB 1441 (Leno) Naturalgas: vented and fugitiveemissions. The bill wouldrequire the California AirResources Board to includefugitive and vented methanegas in its compliance obliga-tions under cap-and-traderules in an attempt to fundthe reduction of fugitivemethane emissions inCalifornia’s methane gasinfrastructure. This meansthat ratepayers won’t bepaying for gas that getsvented or leaks. Support.
AB 1886 (McCarty) Guard-ing California’s BedrockEnvironmental DisclosureLaw: CEQA - transit pri-ority projects. This billweakens CEQA by allowingdevelopment further fromtransit stops than researchshows most people will walkto catch a bus or train toreceive a transit priorityproject and undergo lessenvironmental analysis.Oppose.
AB 2356 (Gomez) Califor-
nia Environmental Qual-ity Act: Infill PlanningProjects. This bill changesbaselines for CEQA to alevel that will allow im-pacts from new develop-ment to go un-analyzed andunmitigated. It essentiallycuts public disclosure andenvironmental protectionfor infill projects. Oppose.
AB 2002 (Stone). Restor-ing the Integrity of theCalifornia Coastal Com-mission. This bill requirespeople who lobby theCoastal Commission toregister as lobbyists anddisclose their employers.The bill requires a two-thirds vote in both housesto pass. Support.
AB 2616 (Burke) Califor-nia Coastal Commission:Environmental JusticeMembership. This billwould increase the mem-bership of the CaliforniaCoastal Commission byappointing 3 additionalmembers who representand work directly withenvironmental justice com-munities. Support.
AB 2628 (Levine) Politi-cal Reform Act of 1974:post-governmental em-ployment. This bill pre-vents ex-Coastal Commis-sioners from immediatelybeing able to lobby theCommission following theend of their term. Support.
AB 1937 (Gomez) Ther-mal powerplants: certifi-cation. Before the EnergyCommission (CEC) certi-fies a new fossil fuel powerplant, this bill would re-quire the CEC to assessalternative sources to meetdemand. If preferable alter-natives exist, the CECwould then be able to re-ject the certification on thegrounds that there arecleaner alternatives tobuilding another dirtypower plant. Support.
AB 2339 (Irwin) Net en-ergy metering. This billwould give more Califor-nians, especially in com-munities hardest hit by therecession, access to cleanenergy generation and itsbenefits by removing barri-ers that prohibit many fromtaking advantage of the netenergy metering (NEM)program. Support.
SB 215 (Leno and Hueso)& SB 512 (Hill) PublicUtilities Commission.These bills would reformthe Public UtilitiesCommission’s (PUC)governance structure bymore clearly outliningthe roles and responsibili-ties of the commissioners
The Sierra Club only considers endorsement of candidates who elect to participate in the Club’s endorsement process. The process is ongoing through much of the electionseason. At press time, the Sierra Club has not yet endorsed candidates for the U.S. Senate from California or other statewide offices.
But who should Ivote for in the racefor...?
BILLS cont. on page 6
Santa Lucian • May 20165
Morro Bay Declines Anti-Sanctuary Invitation
Sign the petition at
Chumash Heritage NationalMarine Sanctuary
Support the
For everything you’veever wanted to know aboutCommunity Choice Energy-- now remaking the energylandscape in California,including, with any luck,SLO County -- there’s a hotnew source of informationon the web: cleanpowerexchange.org, courtesy ofthe Center for Climate Pro-tection. Get hooked up withnews, communities, re-sources, informationalhandouts and an interactivemap of CCE program de-velopment. We’ve been telling youfor ten years why CCE is agame-changer. Now youcan get all the reasons whyin one place. Check it out.
The Sierra Club has released a report on how new tradedeals would give fossil fuel corporations more power toundermine our climate protections. Climate Roadblocks relates how, in January 2016,TransCanada, the corporation behind the Keystone XL tarsands pipeline, laid bare the threats that two pending tradeagreements pose to the movement to protect our climate andkeep fossil fuels in the ground. Just two months after theObama administration rejected the pipeline, TransCanadaannounced it would retaliate by using rules in the NorthAmerican Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) that empowerforeign corporations to challenge domestic policies in pri-vate tribunals. TransCanada now plans to ask three tribunallawyers to order the U.S. government to pay more than $15billion as “compensation” for the Keystone XL decisionthat avoided increased climate disruption. But if two even larger trade deals were to take effect,TransCanada’s case may be just the beginning of a swell ofsuch challenges to hard-fought climate protections. Those deals are the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)—acontroversial pact between the U.S. and eleven Pacific Rimcountries that Congress may consider this year—and theTransatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)—abroad pact under negotiation between the U.S. and the Eu-ropean Union. Both deals would dramatically expand thenumber of corporations that could follow TransCanada’sexample and use private tribunals as a backdoor way tochallenge and potentially undermine U.S. policies that keepfossil fuels in the ground. Like NAFTA, the TPP and TTIP would give foreign cor-porations broad rights, including the right to challenge newfossil fuel restrictions that thwart their “expectations” for astable business environment. The trade deals would em-power the corporations to bypass U.S. courts and take suchchallenges to tribunals of three private lawyers, unaccount-able to any domestic legal system, under a process knownas “investor-state dispute settlement” (ISDS). The law-yers—over half of whom also represent corporations incases against governments—could order the U.S. govern-ment to pay the corporations the profits they hypotheticallywould have earned without the new climate protections.Law firms specializing in ISDS are now explicitly advisingcorporations, including fossil fuel firms, to see ISDS as a“tool” to “prevent” unwanted policies, as threats of costlyISDS cases can chill policy proposals. Policies targeted in recent ISDS cases include a frackingmoratorium in Quebec, a court order to pay for oil pollutionin Ecuador, and new restrictions on a coal-fired power plantin Germany. Shell, BP, Chevron, and ExxonMobil areamong the fossil fuel corporations that have already usedISDS, helping to spur a rapid rise in ISDS cases. Indeed,half of the new cases launched in 2014 targeted policiesaffecting oil or gas extraction, mining, or power generation. For the first time, the TPP and TTIP would enable someof the world’s largest fossil fuel firms to use ISDS to chal-lenge U.S. policies to keep fossil fuels in the ground, in-cluding restrictions on fracking, offshore drilling, federalfossil fuel leasing, and dirty pipelines. Indeed, such firmshave investments in these four fossil fuel sectors across atleast 36 U.S. states (see map at www.sierraclub. org/trade-map). Here are the report’s major findings on these key climatethreats:
• The TPP and TTIP would more than double the number offoreign fossil fuel corporations with the power to challengeU.S. policies in unaccountable ISDS tribunals. The twodeals would newly grant broad foreign investor rights tomore than 1,000 U.S. subsidiaries of over 100 foreign fossilfuel corporations—more than the total number of fossil fuelfirms that have such rights under all 56 existing U.S. tradeand investment pacts combined.
• Forty-five of the 50 private corporations historically re-
Looming Trade DealsThreaten Efforts to KeepFossil Fuels in the Ground
ROADBLOCKS cont. on page 7
At its April 12 meeting,the Morro Bay City Councildeclined an offer by its Har-bor Advisory Board toassemble, on the City’sdime, a panel stacked withnational marine sanctuaryantagonists for the obviouspurpose of attacking theproposed Chumash Heri-tage National Marine Sanc-tuary. In January, the City in-vited the National Oceanicand Atmospheric Admin-istration’s west coast sanc-tuary staff – the people whomanage national marinesanctuaries – to come an-chor a standing-room-only,three-hour informationaltown hall, in which NOAAanswered every question,shot down every rumor,corrected every misstate-ment, and dismissed everyparanoid fantasy presentedto them. (See “Facts vs.Fantasy,” Feb.) Turns outnational marine sanctuariesare really, really good forthe marine environment,water quality, schools,
coastal economies, andfishing. The unspoken subtext ofthe request from the HarborBoard – die-hard sanctuaryfoes, all: Let’s try that againbut without professionals inthe room to correct us. As The Tribune reported,the city council members, inunanimously rejecting theoffer, pointed out that ifmore information and “awider range of perspec-tives” was what the HarborBoard wanted, “a federalsanctuary designation pro-cess, if formally advanced,would hold a public infor-
mation component to allowstakeholders to learn aboutthe effects of a sanctuaryand formally weigh in.” In fact, the entire designa-tion process will consist ofthat “public informationcomponent,” in which ev-erybody will get to have asay, at great length, in mul-tiple forums, in a processlasting over a year. Anyone who really wantsto see a thorough publicprocess happen can go tothe link below and add hisor her name to the list ofpeople asking NOAA toinitiate it.
tinyurl.com/CHNMSpetition
Meanwhile, things havenot been standing still sincelast October when SLOCounty took the plunge andput up $50,000 as its shareof a tri-county CCE feasi-bililty study with SantaBarbara and Ventura Coun-ties. In June, Santa BarbaraCounty will be voting onwhether to include$275,000 its 2017 budgetto go toward the formationof a regional CommunityChoice Energy programwith Ventura and San LuisObispo Counties. Clean energy advocateswill need to get at leastthree Santa Barbara Super-visors to prioritize CCEfunding between now andthen. We applaud the SantaBarbara Board of Supervi-sors for funding the feasi-bility study last year alongwith their counterparts inVentura and San LuisObispo and encouragethem to allocate the neces-sary funding to continuethe work the County hasalready devoted toward
CommunityChoiceEnergyUpdate
CCE cont. on page 8
STOP OFFSHORE DRILLING#KeepItInTheGround
FROM MY HOME TO THE ARCTIC:
6 Santa Lucian • May 2016
interests of the State. The SLC has two consti-tutional appointees, GavinNewsom (Lieutenant Gov-ernor), Betty Yee (statecontroller), and the Direc-tor of Finance (MichaelCohen). In the January 3, 2016,San Francisco Chronicle,Gavin Newsom said, “Ijust don’t see that thisplant is going to survivebeyond 2024, 2025…andthere is a compelling argu-ment as to why itshouldn’t.” Note: Mr. Newsom isrunning for governor. In his comments at thehearing, Alliance AttorneyJohn Geesman made clearthat legally binding re-employment options fordisplaced Diablo workersmust be on the table. It is anticipated that theState Lands Commissionwill initiate the CEQAprocess at their June 28,2016, meeting in Sacra-mento. They will be pro-viding a live video linkagelocally in SLO so con-cerned residents can makepublic comment. For videoof the last hearing andupdates on what’s next,visit: a4nr.org/?p=3855.
3: PG&E’s General RateCase (GRC) at the CPUC PG&E has applied to theCPUC to set its rate struc-ture for the next threeyears in a process knownas the GRC. A4NR hasfiled as an intervenor in theproceeding, represented byformer SDG&E attorneyAl Pak, and featuring testi-mony of John Geesmanand Rochelle Becker. One of the highlights toemerge from this case isPG&E’s request for hun-dreds of millions of dollarsin capital projects atDiablo Canyon, includingthe replacement of a maingenerator “stator” for Unit2. The dilemma posed: Theequipment to be replacedcould easily extend the lifeof the plant for a 20-yearrelicensing by the NRC.But PG&E proposes tofully depreciate these largeinvestments by the year2025, when the currentlicense expires. At thesame time, PG&E con-tends that no expenses intheir current GRC are inany way affiliated withlicense renewal. There’s cognitive disso-nance afoot here: Rate-payers would be “payingoff” these large invest-ments over far fewer (andcostlier) years than if thesewere truly amortized “longterm” investments. (Wouldyou replace the transmis-sion in your old car if you
only intended to drive itanother year?) By recom-mending that PG&E not begiven ratepayer money forsuch a short-term fix, A4NRwill be forcing PG&E tocome clean regarding theirrelicensing attempt. Eitherthey are serious about it(and, by the way, have co-vertly spent over $50 mil-lion on the process—an-other finding in A4NR’sdiscovery process) or theyare not. PG&E’s vague andevasive answers regardinglicense renewal might workas public relations, butA4NR believes more truthwill be revealed when realdollars are at stake. To fol-
On December 18, 2015,saying “I don’t think thatPG&E, in its quiet mo-ments, would disagree thatthis may not have been theideal site for a plant,”Lieutenant GovernorGavin Newsom directedthe State Lands Commis-sion to make a broad envi-ronmental determinationon a lease renewal applica-tion for Diablo Canyon,California’s last opera-tional nuclear power plant. Lt. Governor Newsom,current Chair of the Com-mission, cited the excep-tional circumstances of thepower station, whichstraddles the coastlineamong a patchwork ofrecently identified seismicfault lines. Newsom alsoasked staff to frame thereview within the context
In my experience workinghere in California, I cantell you that I don’t thinknuclear power is in Cali-fornia’s future. I don’tthink it is in the horizon. Isee all these different newsources of power comingon that are much moreenvironmentally friendly,they’re more productive,they’re producing morepower. I can go into detail,but I think generally theconsensus of the legisla-ture, of leaders, is that wewant to move in a newdirection.
- State Senator Ben Hueso at 3/29/2016 meetingof the Senate Energy Committee, before askingfor an “aye” vote on SB 968 directing SLO to pre-pare for the economic effects of the closure ofDiablo Canyon.
and staff and would closeloopholes that have allowedregulated utilities to influ-ence the PUC commission-ers without public engage-ment. Support.
SB 1453 (De León) Elec-trical generation: green-house gases emission per-formance standard. Thisbill would prohibit utilitiesfrom recovering costs forprocurement of energy if itdoes not comply with thePUC’s greenhouse gasemission performance stan-dards. The bill also protectsCalifornia from dirty coalimports by eliminating theoption for a utility tocircumvent compliance withthe state’s landmark GHGemission performance stan-dards. Support.
AB 2029 (Dahle). Protect-ing California’s Wildlife,Natural Areas and Parks.Timber harvesting plans:exemptions. This bill wouldextend a controversial pilotprogram that allows privateforest owners to cut large,older trees without a timberharvest plan under certaincircumstances. The exten-
sion would be allowed earlyand without a full evalua-tion of the pilot program’seffectiveness. It would alsoexpand the exemption totrees that are 28 inches instump diameter, even largertrees than allowed to beharvested without a planduring the existing pilot.Oppose.
AB 2243 (Wood) MedicalCannabis: Cannabis Pro-duction and EnvironmentMitigation. This bill willestablish an excise tax formedical marijuana that ischarged to a licensed medi-cal cannabis cultivatorand collected by a licensedmedical marijuana distribu-tor. The funds collected willpay for environmentalremediation, local law en-forcement, and a programto address environmentallydamaging marijuana culti-vation practices. Support.
AB 2444 (Garcia,Eduardo) California Wa-ter Quality, Coastal Pro-tection, and Outdoor Ac-cess Improvement Act of2016. This bill places theCalifornia Water, Climate,and Coastal Protection andOutdoor Access for All Actof 2016 Bond on the state-
wide general election ballotto finance programs to ex-pand and promote access toand affordability of outdoorstate park activities. Sup-port.
SB 1062 (Lara) El-ephants: prohibited treat-ment. This bill would pro-vide further protection forelephants in California byupdating existing law toprohibit the use ofbullhooks or similar inhu-mane devices. Support.
SB 1114 (Allen) CaliforniaSustainable Swordfishand Marine Life Protec-tion Act.This bill phases out the useof drift gillnets, and autho-rizes the use of deep setbuoy gear, a more sustain-able alternative to driftgillnets. Drift gillnets areresponsible for a substan-tially higher rate of acciden-tal catch and killing of dol-phins and whales than otherfishing gear. Support.
SB 1287 (McGuire) Com-mercial fishing: Dunge-ness crab. This bill allowsDungeness Crab Fishermento collect abandoned crabtraps in the ocean during theoff season, and return them
Billscontinued from page 5
to the proper authorities inexchange for a reward. Theowner of the crab trapmust pay a fine in order toretrieve their trap and beeligible to renew their fish-ing permit for the nextseason. Support.
AB 1759 (Bonta) Hydro-gen fluoride: notice ofuse: substitution. This billwould phase out the use ofhydrofluoric acid in refin-eries over course of oneyear. During that time, itwould require a refinery tonotify residents and busi-nesses that they are in alethal zone, which meansthey are at high risk ofexposure during an inci-dent. Support.
AB 1882 (Williams) Oiland gas: groundwatermonitoring. This bill pro-tects California’s ground-water from underground injection of oil wasteby giving the RegionalWater Boards the ability torequire monitoring ofwells. Support.
AB 2729 (Williams D) Oiland gas: operations. Thisbill would increase bond-ing levels to incentivizeabandonment of wellsrather than allowing forlong-term idle wells tooccur. This bill also pro-vides additional oversightand enforcement to stateagencies. Support.
AB 2756 (Thurmond D)Oil and gas operations:enforcement actions. Thisbill would increase Divi-sion of Oil, Gas, and Geo-thermal Resources’ en-
forcement and oversight foroil and gas operations. It willalso provide the Oil and GasSupervisor authority to as-sess additional penalties toincentivize violators to takeimmediate corrective action.Support.
SB 778 (Allen): Automo-tive repair: oil changes:notification to customers.This bill requires automotiverepair dealers to recommendthe oil drain interval speci-fied in the maintenanceschedule of the vehicle’sowner’s manual for the nextoil change, which is lessfrequent than what is cur-rently recommended. Unnec-essarily frequent oil changescreate more waste for thestate to handle and endangerpublic health, wildlife, eco-systems and our drinkingwater. Support
SB 900 (Jackson) StateLands: Coastal HazardRemoval and RemediationProgram. This bill will pro-tect California’s coastline byrequiring the State LandsCommission to remediateabandoned oil wells inCalifornia’s coastal waters,while also conducting an indepth inventory and assess-ment of all these legacy oilwells. Support.
SB 1161 (Allen) ClimateScience Truth & Account-ability Act. This bill ad-dresses the growing evidencethat fossil fuel companiesworked to deceive the publicabout the realities and risksof climate change for de-cades. Specifically, the billwould extend the statute oflimitations under the state’s
Unfair Competition Lawfrom 4 to 30 years for de-ceptive behavior relating tothe scientific evidence ofclimate change. Support.
AB 2596 (Bloom) Pesti-cides: use of anticoagu-lants. This bill expands thelist of prohibited pesticidesto include those that containfive newly determined anti-coagulants and expands theprohibition geographicallyas well, from just certainwildlife areas to the entirestate. This will ensure thataquatic, terrestrial and avianwildlife remain a fully func-tional and healthy compo-nent of the ecosystems theyinhabit and move through inCalifornia. Support.
SB 1282 (Leno) Pesti-cides: neonicotinoids:labeling and restrictedmaterial designation. Thisbill would require labelingof plants and seeds thatcontain neonicotinoid pesti-cides, indicating that theymay harm bees. Support.
SB 1262 (Pavley) Watersupply planning. This billstrengthens water supplyavailability assessments tolook at groundwater use,preventing developmentwhere there is no watersupply to match demand bythe development’s occu-pants. Support.
SB 1263 (Wieckowski)Public water systems:permits. This bill preventsa permit for a new watersystem from going forwarduntil the State Water Re-
BILLS cont. next page
Diablocontinued from page 1
Diablo At Outfall’s Endof California’s long-termenergy goals, including re-cent codification of the goalslaid out in GovernorBrown’s January 2015 inau-gural address, to generatehalf of the state’s electricityfrom renewable sources by2030. “On the one hand we haveFukushima etched in ourmemories, and on the otherhand we are tackling fossil-fuel driven climate change.This is incredibly complexand of no surprise that deci-sions have been avoided,”said Newsom. “If we coulddecommission Diablo Can-yon and replace it with anequivalent portfolio of re-newable energy sources to-morrow, I would call for it.And while that is not a real-istic option before us today,it is beyond time that we
begin answering whatCalifornia’s energy futurecould look like withoutnuclear power.” The agenda item beforethe State Lands Commis-sion was the considerationof a lease application forthe continued use of stateproperty for the intake andoutfall facilities associatedwith the Diablo CanyonNuclear Power Plant. Theapplication seeks a newlease for a limited term tocoincide with the expirationof the Nuclear RegulatoryCommission licenses in2024. This facility, including theoffshore structures, hasnever been evaluated underthe California Environmen-tal Quality Act. The Lt.Governor stated that leaseapplication should not benarrowly analyzed andshould not avoid a compre-hensive discussion on thebroader implications associ-ated with the future of theDiablo Canyon plant, par-ticularly involving the vari-ous public safety and envi-ronmental issues and along-term vision of thestate’s energy needs andresources. Commission staff hasmade recommendationsdetailing the framework inwhich they should pursuean analysis summarizingrelevant state and localpermitting considerations;identifying public safetyand environmental issues;describing the state’s energyneeds; and identifying criti-cal data gaps regarding thefuture of the Diablo CanyonNuclear Power Plant. The purpose is to movetowards providing a largerpolicy context to help in-form the Commission in itsdecision-making. The plant can’t operatewithout the outfall leases.PG&E is opposing CEQAreview.
Diablo In the Way Over two days in April, The Tribune chose two interest-ing stories for front-page treatment. On April 24, the paperpublished an analysis of how much it’s going to cost todecommission and dismantle the Diablo Canyon NuclearPower Plant after it shuts down, complete with a chart com-paring decommissioning costs for other shuttered nukes.On the 26th, for the front page of its local section, the Tribchose to run “A Nuclear Nightmare,” a McClatchynewswire story marking the thirtieth anniversary of theworld’s worst nuclear disaster by revisiting Chernobyl andthe 3,000-year wasteland surrounding it. It looks like the Trib is joining in the effort to psychologi-cally prepare us for the moment when we must all saygoodbye to Diablo. If so, and if you’ve read the stories atleft and above, you know that’s a good idea. Speaking of good ideas, we herewith excerpt “QualityCareers, Cleaner Planet,” an article by Paul Rauber thatappeared in the July 2015 issue of Sierra. It’s about provid-
Nuclear Plant Shutting Down?Take a Lesson from CoalSierra Club’s approach points the way tolife after Diablo
SHUTTING DOWN cont. on page 8
In addition to all the ingredients of the perfect stormbrewing for Diablo Canyon that the Alliance for NuclearResponsibility points out in our front-page story, there’sone more that really flashes TIME’S UP on the side of thereactor domes: California is moving toward renewableenergy, and Diablo is in the way. An increasingly common shibboleth in pro-nuclear, anti-renewables circles is that California now has too muchrenewable energy and has to selectively shut down solarplants to keep excess energy from overwhelming the grid. Craig Morris of Renew-ables International says “Shed-ding green electricity... is a political decision, not a techni-cal necessity. Germany has made a political decision to go80 percent renewable for power by 2050, and the Germansunderstand that this transition will...ruin the profitability ofcoal and nuclear – in fact, that’s the goal.” Morris recommends getting rid of baseload sources —coal and nuclear — to make room for wind and solar. “Does California have too much solar or too muchbaseload? The answer is political, not technical. If youwant solar and wind, call for an end to baseload.”
low the GRC and readA4NR’s testimony, visit:a4nr.org/?p=3806. All told, it appears thatDiablo Canyon should notbe buying any long-playingrecords, and that the activi-ties outlined above are allpreparing the public for thedemise of California’s lastnuclear reactor. “Better this way,” A4NRattorney John Geesmannotes, “to let the air out ofthe blimp slowly than tosuffer the crash and burnthat doomed the San Onofrereactors three years ago.” That is a lesson San LuisObispo should readily ab-sorb.
Santa Lucian • May 20167
ClassifiedsNext issue deadline is May 17. To get a rate sheet or submit your ad and payment, contact:Sierra Club, P.O. Box 15755, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 or [email protected]
CYNTHIA HAWLEYATTORNEY
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONLAND USE
CIVIL LITIGATION
P.O. Box 29 Cambria California 93428Phone 805-927-5102 Fax 805-927-5220
sources Control Board candetermine that the agencyhas the ability to actuallymanage water. Support.
SB 1317 (Wolk) Condi-tional use permit: ground-water extraction facility.This bill requires a localagency to issue a condi-tional use permit for newwells in high use areas andprohibits permits for newwells in critical or proba-tionary basins where watersupply is critically im-pacted. Support.
SB 1318 (Wolk) Localgovernment: drinkingwater infrastructure orservices: wastewater in-frastructure or services.This bill prevents a LocalAgency Formation Com-mission from approving anew water agency or ex-panding a water agency ifthere are disadvantagedcommunities in the agency’sarea that do not have safedrinking water supplies andthe agency supplies thosecommunities as well. Sup-port.
Billscontinued from page 6
sponsible for the most cli-mate disrupting emissionswould be empowered tochallenge climate policiesin ISDS tribunals under theTPP and TTIP. These 45corporations are collec-tively responsible for morethan 20 percent of theworld’s historical green-house gas emissions. Thelist includes all of the eightlargest private greenhousegas emitters outside of theU.S.?—BP, Shell, Total,BHP Billiton, Anglo Ameri-can, RWE, Eni, and RioTinto—each of whichwould gain the ability tolaunch ISDS challengesagainst U.S. climate protec-tions for the first time.
• The TPP and TTIP wouldmore than double the num-ber of foreign frackingfirms that could use ISDS tochallenge new U.S. frackingrestrictions in private tribu-nals.
• The deals would newlygrant ISDS rights to corpo-rations that are currentlyfracking for gas and/or oilin Arkansas, California,Colorado, Kansas, Louisi-ana, New Mexico, Ohio,Oklahoma, Pennsylvania,Texas, West Virginia, andWyoming.
• The TPP would give ISDS
rights to BHP Billiton, thelargest foreign investor inU.S. shale, while TTIPwould give them to BP andShell, the eighth and 18thlargest gas producers in theU.S., respectively.
• The TPP and TTIP wouldenable oil and gas corpora-tions with more than 10million acres’ worth of U.S.offshore drilling leases touse ISDS to try to under-mine new offshore drillingrestrictions. That is 24 timesmore area than that held bythe much smaller number offoreign leaseholders thatcurrently have access toISDS.
• TTIP would empower oiland gas corporations thatcontrol 85 percent of leasedarea in the U.S. Arctic tochallenge new restrictionson Arctic oil exploration inprivate ISDS tribunals. Nofirm with an oil or gas leasein the U.S. Arctic currentlyhas that power.
• One out of every threeacres off the U.S. coastlinethat is covered by an activedrilling lease is controlledby a fossil fuel corporationthat would gain the abilityunder the TPP and TTIP tolaunch ISDS cases againstnew offshore drilling re-strictions.
• The TPP and TTIP wouldgive ISDS rights to seven ofthe 20 corporations whoseoffshore drilling leasescover the greatest amountof U.S. seabed in the Arctic,the Gulf of Mexico, and thePacific. This includes Shell,which has U.S. offshoredrilling leases that covermore acres than any otherfirm, and BP, which stillholds the highest number ofdrilling leases in the Gulf ofMexico, despite its disas-trous 2010 Gulf oil spill.
• Foreign corporations ownleases for oil and gas ex-traction on more than 1.7million acres of U.S. federallands. More than 40 percentof that public land—over720,000 acres—has beenleased to oil and gas corpo-rations that would gain thepower under the TPP andTTIP to challenge new fed-eral leasing restrictions inprivate tribunals.
• The firms that would gainthis ability to undermineleasing restrictions includeBP and Shell, which rankamong the 30 largest on-shore oil and gas leasehold-ers by land area.
• The TPP and TTIP wouldhand ISDS rights to corpo-rations that own tens ofthousands of miles’ worthof U.S. fossil fuel pipelines.These pipelines cross at
least 29 states in nearlyevery region of the country:the West Coast, the GreatPlains, the Midwest, theSouth, the Mid-Atlantic, theNortheast, and Alaska.
• Some of these corpora-tions are planning to buildeven more fossil fuel pipe-lines. BP, for example, ispartnering with Trans-Canada and others to con-struct an 800-mile gas pipe-line across Alaska. AndNational Grid, the largestgas distributor in the North-east, is taking part in a pipe-line expansion to pumpmore fracked gas throughConnecticut, Massachusetts,and New York. TTIP wouldgive these corporations anew tool to counter growingfossil fuel pipeline opposi-tion, allowing them tothreaten to launch costlyISDS cases if policymakerswould delay or deny theirpipeline proliferation plans.
Thanks to years oforganizing and advo-cating, the movementto keep fossil fuels inthe ground hasachieved some re-markable successesrecently, from thecancellation of newsales of Arctic oil andgas leases, to a mora-torium on new federalcoal leasing, to therejection of the Key-stone XL pipeline.But TransCanada’s use ofNAFTA to challenge thatpipeline rejection in a pri-vate tribunal has madeabundantly clear how over-reaching trade rules canundermine such climatevictories. TransCanada’s warningcomes just in time, giventhat Congress may soonconsider the largest expan-sion to date of those traderules. Just as the U.S. be-gins to transition away fromfossil fuels, the TPP andTTIP would empower anunprecedented number offossil fuel corporations tofollow TransCanada’s leadin asking private tribunalsto help maintain the crisis-prone status quo. The fight for climateprogress already facesenough obstacles withoutthe additional roadblocksimposed by the TPP andTTIP. Replacing these toxicdeals with a new climate-friendly model of trade is anessential component of thegrowing effort to keep fossilfuels in the ground.
Go to Sierraclub.org/trade– get an Activist Toolkit andtell Congress to Vote NO onthe toxic Trans-Pacific Part-nership!
Roadblockscontinued from page 5
TAKE ACTION
8 Santa Lucian • May 2016Outings and Activities CalendarSeller of travel registration information: CST 2087766-40. Registration as a seller of travel does not constitute approval by the State of California.
All our hikes and activities are open to all Club members and the general public. Please bring drinking water to all outings andoptionally a lunch. Sturdy footwear is recommended. All phone numbers listed are within area code 805 unless otherwisenoted. Pets are generally not allowed. A parent or responsible adult must accompany children under the age of 18. If you haveany suggestions for hikes or outdoor activities, questions about the Chapter’s outing policies, or would like to be an outingsleader, call Outings Chair Joe Morris, 549-0355. For information on a specific outing, please call the listed outing leader.
May 8-10, Jun. 12-14, Jul. 17-19, Aug. 21-23,Sept. 25-27, Oct. 23-25. Join us for a 3-day, 3-island, live-aboard cruise to the Channel Islands.Hike windswept trails bordered with blazing wild-flowers. Kayak rugged coastlines. Snorkel in pris-tine waters teeming with colorful fish. Swim withfrolicking seals and sea lions. Look for unusual seaand land birds. Watch for the endangered islandfox. Or just relax at sea!
All cruisesdepart fromSanta Barbara. $650 cost includes an assignedbunk, all meals, snacks and beverages plus theservices of a naturalist-docent assigned by thenational park to help lead hikes, point out itemsof interest and give evening program. For moreinformation, contact leader: Joan Jones Holtz;626-443-0706; [email protected]. To hold a reservation, mail a $100 check toSierra Club, and send to Joan Jones Holtz,11826 The Wye St., El Monte, CA 91732.
Island Hopping in Channel Islands National Park
This is a partial listing of Outingsoffered by our chapter.
Please check the web pagewww.santalucia.sierraclub.org for
the most up-to-date listing ofactivities.
Fri., May 6, 11 a.m. Mother’s Day Brunch Cooking Class at SLO Botanical Garden.Join fabulous foodie Mary Ann Rutshaw for a spectacular cookingclass that is sure to spruce up your brunch menu. Learn to maketasty, beautiful treats to “wow” your guests! More info at slobg.org/cooking. Oak Glen Pavilion, SLO Botanical Garden, 3450 DairyCreek Rd, SLO. $15 for Garden members, $20 for public. 805-541-1400 x305.
Sat., May 7, 9-11 a.m. Birding at SLO Botanical Garden withMorro Coast Audubon Society. Join Jay Carroll and Eric Wier of
the MorroCoast Audu-bon Society onthis fun, family-friendly birding walkthrough SLO Botanical Garden. Formore info, visit slobg.org/birding.SLO Botanical Garden, 3450 DairyCreek Rd, SLO. $5 for Garden mem-bers, $10 for public. 805-541-1400x305.
Sat., May 14,1-2 p.m. Get-ting to Know
Your Palms at SLO Botanical Garden. Join Dr. Jenn Yost, profes-sor of botany at Cal Poly State University, for this engaging lectureon the diversity of palm plants. Learn about palm biology, conserva-tion, and much more! Free docent led tour at 2PM. Info at slobg.org/palm. SLO Botanical Garden, 3450 Dairy Creek Rd, SLO. $5 forGarden members, $10 for public.
Sat., May 7th, 8 a.m.,Twitchell, Stone Ridge,and Kirk Creek Hike.Strenuous, eleven-mile,3,000 ft. gain loop hikewithin the shadow of ConePeak, including a 2.5 milecar shuttle. We start atnorth end past Limekilnand have a strenuous climbof 2,000 ft in first twohours; rest of loop is lesssteep. Poison oak presentalong trail. Bring lunch,lots of water, and expect tobe on the trail 6-7 hours.Meet at Washburn DayUse area north of Cambriaon Hwy 1 to carpool. Ex-treme heat will postponehike. Need to call leaderbeforehand if going:Carlos Diaz-Saavedra,546-0317.
Sat., May 21st, 10 a.m.Trekking-Pole Hike atEagle Rock. Come on atwo-mile, 400 ft. gain hike,
to learn, practice and seedemonstrated the energy-conserving use of trekkingpoles. Meet at the trailheadfor Eagle Rock, going to thelocked gate past the Botani-cal Gardens, across Hwy 1from Cuesta College, in theparking lot to the left. Theremay be a small entry fee.Leader: David Georgi, 458-5575 or [email protected].
Sun., May 22nd, 2 p.m.Historic Walk of ArroyoGrande Village. Come onan easy, guided strollthrough the well-preserved,century-old downtown ofArroyo Grande to see suchsights as the 1901 one-roomschoolhouse, the 1906hoosegow, the famousswinging bridge, andcharming Victorians wherethe town’s pioneers lived. Meet at corner of Branchand Bridge Sts., parking
lots nearby. Leader: JoeMorris, 549-0355.
Fri.-Mon., May 27th-30th.Memorial Day NevadaWilderness Service Trip. Annual service trip of Calif/Nev. Wilderness Commit-tee, this year to WeepahSpring Wilderness, onnorthern edge of Nevada’snew Basin and Range Na-tional Monument, workingwith ranger John Miller.Included is hike to Mt.Irish. Optional central com-missary. Leader: VickyHoover, 415-977-5527 [email protected]
Tues., May 31st, 7-9 p.m.Bimonthly General Meet-ing: “David’s Dozen: TheBest Unfamiliar Hikes inSan Luis Obispo County.”Last year drew a SROcrowd, so tonight experi-enced outings leader DavidGeorgi treats us to anotherpresentation of anotherdozen of his favorite, less-travelled trails, with slides,of course. Environmentalannouncements begin themeeting. Meets at theSteynberg Gallery, 1531Monterey St., SLO. Leader: Joe Morris, 549-0355.
ing transition assistance tocoal workers and commu-nities as coal-fired powerplants shut down, but thelessons are transferrable.
Quality Careers,Cleaner Planet The Sierra Club supportsa fair and just transition toclean energy, with jobsecurity and livelihoodsupport for affected work-ers, preservation of pen-sions and healthcare, andtraining for jobs in otherindustries—ideally union-ized—with similar pay andbenefits. The Sierra Clubis working toward thislarger goal in sometimes-small steps, even as Clubactivists and attorneystarget coal plants for clo-sure. In the 2013 shutdown ofthe Big Sandy plant in
Kentucky, for example, theClub insisted on and wonconcessions from AmericanElectric Power to ease thetransition for the commu-nity. These included fundsfor economic developmentand for weatherization andother energy-efficiencyprograms, in order tostretch utility dollars. And when the closure ofthe giant coal-fired powerplant in Centralia, Washing-ton, was negotiated, theClub, together with affectedunions, insisted that a multi-million-dollar package forworkers and the communitybe part of the final deal. The other side of the JustTransition equation is jobcreation. A report from theUniversity of California atBerkeley noted that a part-nership between the Sierra
Club and the InternationalBrotherhood of ElectricalWorkers helped lead tomore than 15,000 greenjobs in California’s solarindustry alone. Workersbuilding solar arrays earnan average salary of$78,000 per year, plushealthcare and other ben-efits. Nationwide, medianwages in the clean energysector are 13 percent higherthan those in the broadereconomy. Key to this employmentboom, the report said, werethe policies advocated bythe Sierra Club/IBEW alli-ance: strong state and na-tional clean energy policiescoupled with “high road”practices favoring good-quality jobs, strong prevail-ing-wages laws, and unionapprenticeship programs.
—Paul Rauber
Shutting downcontinued from page 6
It doesn’t look good Twodays, two front pages. Thedays when The Tribune wouldprint PG&E press releasesabout Diablo Canyon and callit good appear to be over.
Activities sponsored by otherorganizations (805) 549-0355
Weepah Spring Wilderness
Community Choice Energy. Marin Clean Energy,Sonoma Clean Power, andLancaster Choice Energyhave clearly demonstratedthat CCE programs canoffer both greenhouse gasreductions and substantialfinancial savings thoughcompetitive and most oftencheaper electricity rates. Inthe next year, three newCCE programs will launchin San Francisco, SanMateo and Humboldt Coun-ties. The emergence ofthese programs reflects thefact that communitiesacross California are recog-nizing the advantages ofCommunity Choice Energy. That’s because Commu-nity Choice Energy is pro-viding both economic andenvironmental benefits. One of the most signifi-cant benefits: Competitive,stable energy costs. MarinClean Energy, SonomaClean Power, and LancasterChoice Energy all offerelectricity rates competitivewith or cheaper than theinvestor owned utilities. In2014-15, Marin Clean En-ergy and Sonoma CleanPower combined to savetheir customers more than$29.6 million on electricitybills. Furthermore, revenuesgenerated by CCE programs
can be reinvested into asuite of services (energyefficiency upgrades, distrib-uted energy generation,automated demand re-sponse, and smart grid tech-nology) that can reduceenergy use, foster a moreresilient energy system andcreate additional cost sav-ings for ratepayers. All three existing pro-grams offer energy mixeswith higher percentages ofclean renewable energy(and lower GHG emissions)than the incumbent inves-tor-owned utilities. Com-munity Choice Energy isidentified in Santa BarbaraCounty’s Climate ActionPlan as the most impactfulmeasure for reducing GHGemissions. Marin andSonoma’s CCE programshave avoided the emissionof more than 117,000 met-ric tons of carbon dioxide. CCE means new businessopportunities. CommunityChoice Energy programshave the power to turn roof-tops, parking lots, and otherunder-utilized spaces intogeneration sites that pro-duce energy and revenue assurplus power is sold intothe grid. Community-wide eco-nomic gains, including localjob creation, can be realized
by retaining the millions ofdollars of electricity pay-ments currently flowingfrom counties to investorowned utilities, and rein-vesting these dollars intocommunity and local energyprojects. A CCE programwill stimulate the economyand create jobs, especiallyfor building trades. In light of these potentialbenefits, we trust SantaBarbara County next monthwill put funding toward thedevelopment of a CCE pro-gram. Santa Barbara has theresources to realize thevision and promise of aprogram that offers rate-payers competition andchoice, stimulates the localeconomy, improves resil-iency, and maximizes envi-ronmental benefits. We urgethe Board of Supervisors toinclude the funds in their2016-17 budget to supportCommunity Choice Energy. SLO County and VenturaCounty will not be contem-plating allocation of fundsuntil the regional Commu-nity Choice feasibility studyis completed in September(see “All In,” March). So this summer and fall,SLO County residents willneed to let our supervisorsknow we support Commu-nity Choice.
